Madrasdated High Court · 2007

S NEELAKANDAN MANAGING PARTNER, ROYAL VALLEY ESTATE, NADUVATTAM, THE NILGIRIS... Petitioner in W.P.No.24195/07M.P.KANDASWAMY PROPRIETOR,GREEN ACRES, DEVALA,DEVALA POST, GUDALUR TALUK,THE NILGIRIS.... Petitioner in W.P.No.24196/07MR.KENNATH GONSALVES,S/O. MR. A.J. GONSALVESBLACK WOOD, WESTBARY ROADUDAGAMANDALAM... Petitioner in W.P.No.25328/07Mr. GEORGE JOSEPH S/O. K.V. JOSEPHKOCHIKUNNEL PLANTATIONSKOZHIPALAM, GUDALUR TALUK,NILGIRIS DISTRICT... Petitioner in W.P.No.25332/071 M.GOPINATHAN 2 DHANYA GOPINATHAN 3 VANDANA GOPINATHAN 4 DEEPA GOPINATHAN ALL ARE REP BY THEIR POWER AGENTC. KURUNAKARAN NAIRS/O. AMMU AMMA, DHANALAKSHMI ESTATESKOZHIPALAM, GUDALORETHE NILGIRIS DISTRICT... Petitioner in W.P.No.25472/071 P.M ZACHARIAH 2 MRS.K.A. GEORGE KUTTYAMMA PM C/O. P.M.ZACHARIAH3 GEOGE P. MATHEW C/O. P.M.ZACHARIAH4 ANNIE JOHN C/O. P.M.ZACHARIAH... Petitioner in W.P.No.25511/071 DR. U. SULEIKHA 2 SREELEKHA SREEDHARAN 3 UDHAYABHANU SREEDHARAN 4 SREEDEVI 5 S. SREEKUMAR ... Petitioner in W.P.No.25512/071 DR. L. SUNDARAM 2 DR SHIVANAND 3 SASI SUNDARAM ... Petitioner in W.P.No.25513/07 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1 M.P. PHILIP 2 SUSAMMA ZACHARIAH ... Petitioner in W.P.No.25514/07MANNISSERY ABOOBAKER ... Petitioner in W.P.No.25578/071.DINESH LUKE 2 ELIZABETH LUKE3 ANITA LUKE RR2 AND 3 REPRESENTED BY THEIRPOWER OF ATTORNEY DINESH LUKE... Petitioner in W.P.No.25892/071 MRS. SIVAGAMI RAMANATHAN 2 MRS. UNNAMALAI PALANIAPPAN3 MRS. VISALAKSHI THANNEERMALAIREP BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEYMRS. SIVAGAMI NARAYANAN... Petitioner in W.P.No.25592/071 T.NANDHAKUMAR 2 T.RAMACHANDREN 3 J.VAITHEESARA 4 J.DIVAKARAN 5 GAJALAKSHMI ... Petitioner in W.P.No.25985/071. K.B. SUGUMAR2. K.B. BHUVANESWARI3. K.B. SAMPATH4. K.B. JAGADEESAN5. K.C. BALAN... Petitioner in W.P.No.25987/071 R.ASHOK RAJAN 2 R.LALITH ACHOTH... Petitioner in W.P.No.26289/07R.BALAKRISHNAN MANAGING PARTNERROYAL VALLEY ESTATENADUVATTAMTHE NILGIRIS... Petitioner in W.P.No.26516/07-vs- The State of Tamil Nadu rep. By its Secretary to Govt., Revenue Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.... FIRST RESPONDENT IN W.P.Nos.22501, 23286, 23334,23694, 24028, 24195, 24196, 25328,25332, 25472, 25511, 25512,25513, 25514, 25578, 25892,25592,25985, 25987, 26289 26516 of 2007 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ The Collector, Nilgiris District, Collectorate, Udhagamandalam, Nilgiris.... SECOND RESPONDENT IN W.P.Nos.22501, 23286, 23334,24028, 24195, 24196, 25328, 25332,25511, 25512, 25513, 25514, 25578,25892,25592, 25985, 25987,26516 of2007FOURTH RESPONDENT INW.P.23694/2007THIRD RESPONDENT INW.P.25472/2007, 26289/07 The Settlement Officer (Gudalur Jenmom Estates) The Collectorate of the Nilgiris, Udhagamandalam, Nilgiris Distrit... THIRD RESPONDENT IN W.P.NOS. W.P.Nos.22501, 24028, 24195,24196, 25328, 25332, 25511,25512, 25513, 25514, 25578,25892, 25985, 25987, 26516 of2007FOURTH RESPONDENT INW.P.23286, 23334 AND 25592 /07SECOND RESPONDENT INW.P.23694/2007, 25472/2007 AND26289/07. The Secretary to Government Forest Department (R4 impleaded as per suo motu order dt.2.8.07 by VDPJ in W.P.22501/07)23286/2007, 23334/2007, 24028/2007,24195/2007, 24196/2007, 25328/200725332/2007, 25472/2007, 25511/2007,25512/2007, 25513/2007, 25514/2007, 25578/2007, 25592/2007, 25986 and 25987/2007... Fourth Respondents in W.P..22501 of 2007, 24028/2007, 24195/2007, 24196/2007, 25511, 25512/2007, 25513, 25514/2007, 25578, 25987/07R6 in W.P.23286/2007, 23334,25592/07.R5 in W.P.25328/2007,25332/07R8 in W.P.25472/2007 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ The Commissioner and Directorof Survey and settlementChepauk, Chennai-5... R3 in W.P.23286/07, 23334, 25592/07. The Executive OfficerO' Valley Town PanchayatNew Hope- 643 226The Nilgiris... R5 in W.P.23286/07, 23334/07.... R4 in W.P.25328/2007The Director of Survey andSettlement, Chepauk,Chennai-600 005.... R3 in W.P.23694/2007The Executive OfficerGudalur MunicipalityNilgiris District... R4 in W.P.25332/2007The District Forest OfficerGudalur Division, Gudalur post 643 211Nilgiris District... R5 in W.P.23694/ 2007... R7 in W.P.25472/2007, W.P.26289/2007The Executive OfficerGudalur III Grade MunicipalityGudalur, The Nilgiris District... R6 in W.P.25472/2007 W.P.26289/2007The Revenue Divisional OfficerGudalur, The Nilgiris District... R4 in W.P.25472/2007, 26289/2007The TahsildarGudalur, The Nilgiris District... R5 in W.P.25472/2007, 26289/2007The Executive OfficerPandalur Town PanchayatNelliyalamThe Nilgiris... R5 in W.P.25592/2007Writ Petition presented to this Court under Article 226 of theConstitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus forbearing therespondents, their subordinates and servants from interfering in anymanner with the possession and enjoyment of the lands of the membersof the Petitioner Association, till the disposal of the applicationsmade by the Member, as per annexure of the Petitioner Associationpursuant to the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 18.08.1999made in Civil Appeal Nos.368-372, and 374-375 of 1977 and I.A.No.24- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 32 in C.A.Nos.367-375 of 1977 and without giving an opportunity tothe members of the Petitioner Association in W.P.22501 of 2007.2. Lands of Petitioner estate as set out hereunderBarwood Estate, in S.Nos. R.S. 13/1 to 10,13/11A1, 13/12, 13/13.O' valley village in extent of 319.5 acres till the disposal of theapplication submitted by the petitioner after giving an opportunityto the petitioner and forwarded by the 3rd Respondent to the 4threspondent vide letter L.DIS (G2) 5307/2001 dt.6.7.2001 and thereby(in WP 23286/2007),3. Lands of Petitioner estate as set out hereunder BalmadiesEstate, in S.Nos. R.S. 2/1, to 4, 3/1,3/2,3/3,3/4,3/5 in O'Valley Village in extent of 422.77 acres till the disposal of theapplications made by the petitioner pursuant to the orders of theHon'ble Supreme Court dt.18.8.1999 made in Civil Appeal Nos.368-372 &374-375 of 1977 and I.A.No.24-32 in CA Nos.367- 375 of 1977 and aftergiving an opportunity to the petitioner (in WP 23334/2007)4. To direct the 2nd 2nd respondent settlement officer toconsider the application dated 30.10.1999 for ryotwari patta filed bythe petitioner and to determine their claims in accordance with theprovisions of Section 12 of Janmam Act 1969 expeditiously( inWP.23694/07) 5. lands of the petitioners, as set out hereunder,Extent 1MOHAMED S.No.R.S.96/2 DEVALA 0.5 CENTS IBRAHIM KOTHRAT Village 2RAZEYA MOHAMED R.S.96/2, DEVALA4.64 ACRES 96/3Village 3RAZEYA MOHAMED R.S.96/4 DEVALA 4.63 ACRESVillage 4MOHAMED IBRAHIM R.S.96/1, DEVALA 9.28 ACRES KOOTHRAT 96/2Village 5MOHAMED IBRAHIM R.S.96/2 DEVALA 0.45 CENTS KOOTHRAT PARTVillage 6MOHAMED IBRAHIM R.S.95/1 DEVALA 2.00 ACRES KOOTHRATVillage 7MOHAMED IBRAHIM R.S.96/2 DEVALA 0.05 ACRES KOOTHRAT Village the disposal of the applications of the petitioners pursuant tothe orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dt 18.8.1999 made in CivilAppeal Nos.368-372 & 374-375 of 1977 and I.A.No.24-32 in CA Nos.367-375 of 1977 and without giving an opportunity to the petitioners (inWP.24028/2007)6. lands of petitioner till the disposal of the application https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ dated 28.6.2007 made by the petitioner for grant of RyotwariPatta to the 3rd respondent pursuant to the orders of the Hon'bleSupreme Court dated 18.8.1999 made in Civil Appeal Nos 368-372 374&375 of 1977 in I.A No. 24-32 in CA Nos.367-375 of 1977 and withoutgiving an opportunity to the petitioners.Schedule An extent of 229.59 acres Agricultural lands in O.S.Nos.1/1.1/2. 1/3. 1/4. 1/5. 1/6, 1/7. 1/8, (46/B1 A1, A2 and 46/1A, 1A 2A)relating to R.S.Nos.474, 475/1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, 476, 477, 478,479, 480 of O' valley Village, Gudalur Taluk, Nilgiris (inWP.24195/2007) 7. Lands of petitioner till the disposal of the applicationdated 28.6.2007 made by the petitioner for grant of Ryotwari Pattato the respondents pursuant to the orders of the Hon'ble SupremeCourt dated 18.8.1999 made in Civil Appeal Nos 368-372 374& 375 of1977 in I.A No. 24 -32 in CA Nos.367-375 of 1977 and without givingan opportunity to the petitioner.Schedule:- An Extent of 34.39 acres of agricultural Land inR.S.No.418, 427, 428, 429, 431, 432, 433 of Devala Village, GudalurTaluk, The Nilgiris District (W.P.NO.24196/2007).8. the lands of the petitioner comprised in S.NO.33, O'VallyVillage, Gudalore Taluk., Nilgris District to an extend of 609.54acres till the disposal of the application of the petitioner dated6.11.01 made by the petitioner to the 3rd respondent to grantryotwari patta under Section 9 of Act 24/69 pursuant to the order ofthe Hon'ble Supreme Court, dated 18.8.1999 made in Civil AppealNos.368-372 and 374-375 of 1977 and I.A.Nos.24-32 in C.A.Nos. 367-375of 1977 and after giving adequate opportunity (in WP.No.25328/2007)9.The lands of the petitioner comprised in various S.Nos.Enclosed in the list here with in Kochikunnel Plantations, to a totalextend of 73.14 acres in Padanthorai Village, of Gudalur Taluk,Nilgiris District till the disposal of the application of thepetitioners predecessors in title's application dated 5.9.1981 andthe application of the petitioner herein dated 27.4.1988 to the 3rdrespondent to grant ryotwari patta under section 9 of Act 24/69pursuant to the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, dated 18.8.1999made in Civil Appeal Nos.368-372 and 374-375 of 1977 and I.A.Nos.24-32 in C.A.Nos.367-375 of 1977 and after giving adequate opportunity(in WP.25332/2007)10. forbearing the Respondents from dispossessing or interferingor disturbing the petitioners possession and cultivation of theirlease-hold lands bearing R.S.Nos.1154 & 1159/2, 3, 4, & 5 in GudalurVillage, the Nilgirs measuring 244.80 acres bounded on the North byGrace Hill Factory Road, South by pandiar poonambalur River, East bythe lands belonging to Sai Estates, and West by the lands belongingto the coffee Board in any manner till the disposal of theApplication for grant of Ryotwari Patta for those lands filed underthe Gudalur Janmom Estate (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari)Act, 1969 by the 2nd Respondent (in WP.25472/07) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

11. the lands of the Petitioners, as set out hereunder, 1 P.M.ZACHARIAH S.NO..1268/16,15,18 GUDALUR 1.80 acres / EXTENT VILLAGE 2 K.A.GEORGE S.No.1269/2 pt,3 pt GUDALUR 10.96 acres / EXTENTVillAGE3 GEORGE P MATHEW S.NO.1269/3 pt GUDALUR 5.50 acres / EXTENTVillage 4 ANNIE JOHN S.No. 1269/2 GUDALUR 8.70 acres/ EXTENTVillagetill the disposal of the applications of the Petitioners pursuant tothe orders of the Hon'ble supreme Court dated 18.08.1999 made inCivil Appeal Nos.368-372 & 374-375 of 1977 and I.A.No.24-32 in CANos.367-375 of 1977, and without giving an opportunity to thePetitioners ( in WP No. 25511/07)12. The lands of the Petitioners, as set out hereunder1.DR.U.SULEIKHA 115/1,2 CHERUMULLI 12.5 acres extentVILLAGE2 SREELEKHA SREEDHARAN 115/1,2 CHERUMULLI 12.5 acres extentVILLAGE3 UDHAYABANU SREEDHARAN 115/1,2 CHERUMULLI 12.5 acres extentVILLAGE4 SREEDEVI 115/1,2 CHERUMULLI 12.5 acres extent VILLAGE5 S.SREEKUMAR 115/1,2 CHERUMULLI 12.5 acres extentVILLAGEtill the disposal of the applications of the Petitioners pursuant tothe orders of the Hon'ble supreme Court dated 18.08.1999 made inCivil Appeal Nos.368-372 & 374-375 of 1977 and I.A.No.24-32 in CANos.367-375 of 1977, and without giving an opportunity to thePetitioners ( in WP No. 25512/07)13.the lands of the Petitioners, as set out hereunder, Sl.Nos.1 DR.L.SUNDARAM 1195 GUDALUR 4.92 acres EXTENT2 DR SHIVANAND 1195 GUDALUR 4.92 acres EXTENT3 SASI SUNDARAM 1195 GUDALUR 4.92 acres EXTENTtill the disposal of the applications of the Petitioners pursuant tothe orders of the Hon'ble supreme Court dated 18.08.1999 made inCivil Appeal Nos.368-372 & 374-375 of 1977 and I.A.No.24-32 in CANos.367-375 of 1977, and without giving an opportunity to thePetitioners ( in WP No. 25513/07)14.The lands of the Petitioners, as set out hereunder, S.Nos.1 M.P.PHILIP 1194 GUDALUR Village 11.09 acres EXTENT2 SUSAMMA ZACHARIAH 1194 GUDALUR Village 3.00 acres EXTENT https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ till the disposal of the applications of the Petitioners pursuant tothe orders of the Hon'ble supreme Court dated 18.08.1999 made inCivil Appeal Nos.368-372 & 374-375 of 1977 and I.A.No.24-32 in CANos.367-375 of 1977, and without giving an opportunity to thePetitioners ( in WP No. 25514/07)15.the lands of the petitioner, as set out hereunder, Sl.Nos.1 Mannissery Aboobaker 396/1,396/3,397 pt.,GUDALUR village17.00 acres extent till the disposal of the applications of thepetitioner pursuant to the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated18.8.1999 made in Civil Appeal Nos.368-372 & 374-375 of 1977 andI.A.No.24-32 in CA Nos.367-375 of 1977, and without giving anopportunity to the petitioner. (in WP 25578/07)16.the lands of the petitioners as set out hereunder, S.Nos.1. E.Luke 200/17, 195/3, 404/1A, 195/2A, 1C, 1A3, 1D Gudalurvillage 21.77 acres extent2. Elizabeth Luke 195/2A, 195/1A2,1A3 Gudalur11.96 acres extent3. Sosamma Samuel 195/3, 200/17Gudalur 8.63 acres extenttill the disposal of the applications of the petitioners pursuant tothe orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 18.8.1999 made in CivilAppeal Nos.368-372 & 374-375 of 1977 and I.A.Nos.24-32 in CA Nos.367-375 of 1977, and without giving an opportunity to the petitioner (INWP.No.25892/2007) 17. the lands of the Petitioner Estate comprised in R.S No. 466,467 and 470 of Devala Village, Gudalur Taluk, Udagamandalam Taluk,Nilgiris District till the disposal of the applications submitted bythe petitioners on 20.5.2004 before the 3rd respondent, after givingthem an opportunity. (W.P.No.25592 of 2007)18.The lands of the petitioners, as set out hereunder,S.Nos.1. T.NANDHAKUMAR, 128/14, 131/3,132, CHERUMULLI Village 36.35 acresExtent.2. T.RAMACHANDREN, 131/3, 128/2,128/7, CHERUMULLI Village 7.58 acresExtent3. J.VAITHEESARAN, 128/14 pt, CHERUMULLI Village, 7.65 acres Extent4. J.DIVAKARAN, 128/14, 128/2, CHERUMULLI Village 7.25 acres Extent5. GAJALAKSHMI, 128/14 pt, CHERUMULLI Village 7.50 acres Extent.till the disposal of the applications of the petitioners pursuant tothe orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 18.8.1999 made in CivilAppeal Nos.368-372 & 374-375 of 1977 and I.A.No.24-32 in CA Nos.367-375 of 1977 and without giving an opportunity to the petitioners (inWP.25985/07) 19. the lands of the Petitioner as set our hereunder in S.Nos.1 K.B. Sugumar- 255- Nelliyalam - 10.00 acres extent2. K.B. Sampath- 255- Nelliyalam- 11-00 acres extent3. K.B. Bhuvaneswari- 253- Nelliyalam-10.79 acres extent4. K.B. Jagadeesan- 253, 251, Nelliyalam- 10.25 acres extent https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5. K.C. Balan- 255- Nelliyalam- 5.56 acres extent till the disposalof the application of the petitioners pursuant to the order of theHon'ble Supreme Court dated 18.8.1999 made in Civil Appeal Nos.368-372 & 374-375 of 1977 and I.A.No.24-32 in CA Nos.367- 375 of 1977 andwithout giving an opportunity to the petitioners (W.P.25987 of 2007)20. Writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents fromdispossesing or interfering or disturbing the petitioners possessionand cultivation of their lease-hold lands bearing (Old S.No.70/6B( R.S.Nos.387, 390/2, 391/1, 391/4, 391/5, 392/1, 392/2, 392/5,392/6, 392/7 and 392/8 in Gudalur Village, measuring 24.41 acres andbounded on the North and South by Gudalur Sulthan Battery Road andEast and West by paddy field in any manner till the disposal oftheir Applications, including the Application dated. 30.10.1999 forgrant of Ryotwari Patta for those lands filed under the GudalurJanmam Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1969, bythe 2nd Respondent (in WP.26289/2007) 22. writ of mandamus Forbearing the Respondents theirsubordinates and servants from interfering in any manner with thepossession and enjoyment of lands of petitioner till the disposal ofthe application dated 28.6.2007 made by the petitioner for grant ofRyotwari Patta to the 3rd respondent pursuant to the orders of theHon'ble Supreme Court dated 18.8.1999 made in Civil Appeal Nos.368-372 & 374-375 of 1977 and I.A.No.24-32 in CA Nos. 367-375 of 1977 andwithout giving on opportunity to the petitioner.SCHEDULE:- An extent of 229.59 acres of Agricultural Lands inO.S.Nos.1/1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/5, 1/6, 1/7, 1/8/ 46/B1, A1, A2 and46/1A 1A 2A) for relating to R.S.Nos.474, 475/1,2,3,4,5, and 6, 476,477, 478, 479, 480 of O' Valley village, Gudalur Taluk, Nilgiris. (inWP.26516/07)R.Muthukumaraswamy, SC andM/s T.S.Gopalan & Co.Advocate for petitioner W.P.No.22501, 23286, 23334, 24028, 25511, 25512, 25513, 25514, 25578, 25892, 25985, 25987/07Mr.A.Prabhakaran, E. Maharajan Advocate for Petitioner : Petitioner in W.P.23694/2007M/s. K.A. Ramakrishnan and S. Sukumar: Petitioner in W.P.24195, 24196 and 26516/2007Mrs.Nalini Chidambaram, SC and Mr.Silambannan, SC , for M/s Silambannan Associates , :Petitioner in:W.P.25328/2007, 25332/2007Mr.T.P. Manoharan, Petitioner in W.P.25472/2007 and 26289/2007 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ M/s. G.R.M. Palaniappan, S. Muthu Venkatraman : Petitioner in W.P.25592/2007.For respondents in all Wps : Mr.P.S.Raman, Addl.Advocate Generalassisted by Mr.A.Edwin Prabhakar,AGP for State Governmentand assisted by Mr.S.N.Kirubanandam,SGPfor Forest department.C O M M O N O R D E RAn association by name Gudalur and Pandalur Farmers Associationrepresented by its Secretary and individual lessees of the Estateconcerned have filed these writ petitions praying for a mandamusseeking to direct the respondents from interfering in any manner withthe possession and enjoyment of the lands of the petitioners till thedisposal of the applications of the petitioners pursuant to theorders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 18.08.1999 made in CivilAppeal Nos.368-372 and 374-375 of 1977 and I.A.No.24-32 inC.A.Nos.367-375 of 1977 and without giving an opportunity to thepetitioners.2. All the petitioners have a common grievance and the factsand circumstances set out by them are also common. The relief soughtfor by the petitioners are identical. Therefore, all the petitionshave been taken up and a common order is passed.3. The brief facts leading to these cases are as follows:- Thepetitioners are the farmers engaged in cultivation of land in theproperties as set out in the annexure of the respective writpetitions. Their parents had purchased the properties through varioussale deeds and the extend of lands have been indicated in everypetition. All kinds of agricultural crops including tea, coffee,cardamon, pepper, ginger etc. are grown in the said lands. The landsare used for agricultural purposes and there are dwelling houses inthe said properties. Most of them are medium farmers doing thecultivation and they are in continuous possession of lands and haveaccess also. The Government is responsible for the enforcement andimplementation of the Gudalur Janmam Estates (Abolition andConversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as "TheJanmam Act") and the Secretary of the Revenue Department is theauthority to control and enforce the lands. The third respondent isthe officer appointed by the Government under section 5 of the JanmamAct to carry out the functions assigned to him under the Act. Hismain function is to consider the applications for the grant ofryotwari patta under the Act. Some of the petitioners have also madean application and some of them are yet to make applications. TheDirector of Survey and Settlement is an authority who guides andassess the work of the settlement officer and directs action that isto to be taken by the authorities in respect of the petitionerslands. Earlier in some writ petitions, the provisions of the Act https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ were challenged in the year 1970. This Court, in its common Judgmentin W.P.Nos.64, 117 to 121, 185, 186 and 200 of 1970 dated 26.10.1970dismissed the writ petitions upholding the validity of the said Act.Aggrieved by the said order passed by this Court, certain petitionershave filed Civil Appeals and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a commonJudgment on 19.04.1972 also upheld the validity of the said Actexcept the provisions of Section 3 in so far as it vested forest landin the Janmam Estate in the State of Tamil Nadu. In 1974, aConstitution Amendment Act was passed and the said Act was insertedin the IX schedule of the Constitution of India by the 34thConstitution Amendment Act. Thereafter the said Act was brought intoforce with effect from 27.11.1974 and the entire Janmam Estate vestedwith the State of Tamil Nadu. The said Act was again challenged inthis Court by the Janmies and lessees in W.P.Nos.4836/74. 2307/75,4769 to 4774/75, 693/75 and 90 of 1975. All the writ petitions weredisposed of by a common Judgment dated 26.09.1976. While settlementproceedings were under process, 11 major estates to whom lands wereleased out by the Janmies for raising plantation crops by means oflong term lease deeds took up the matter before the Hon'ble SupremeCourt in 1976 and 1977 against implementation of the said Act. TheHon'ble Supreme Court in its interim Judgment in CMP Nos.1229 to 1237of 1977 in C.A.Nos.367 to 375 of 1977 dated 23.08.1978 had orderedinterim stay with certain conditions. The said stay was in force till1999. In which 9 out of 11 major estates sought to withdraw theirpetitions from the Hon'ble Supreme Court and finally the Hon'bleSupreme Court allowed the withdrawal and in its order in WritPetition (C) No.199 of 1998 dated 18.08.1999 and C.A.Nos.367 & 373 of1977 dated 07.09.1999 disposed of the Civil Appeals stating that onan application by the counsel for the appellants, the Civil Appealswere dismissed. It is also further held that the applicants shall beentitled to challenge by appropriate proceedings an order passed bythe State Government against them either on their application undersection 9 or under section 17 of the said Act that such an ordershall not be executed against them for a period of twelve weeks toenable them to challenge the same.4. After the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, thesepetitioners made applications and some of them have taken steps toget the order enforced. However, the petitioners steps to get theryotwari patta under Section 9 and in some cases under section 17 ofthe Act are under consideration. When that being the position, therespondents have put up a notice board in respect of all petitionersand issued notices to some of the petitioners threatening to evictthem from their respective lands and therefore the petitioners havemoved these petitions before this Court seeking the relief as statedsupra.5. The respondents have filed a common counter in all thesepetitions. The counter of the respondents has traced the history ofthe Janmam lands. It is submitted in the counter that with a view tobring Janmam lands under Ryotwari tenure like other similar Ryotwarilands, the Government took a policy decision and enacted the TamilNadu Gudalur Janmam Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari)Act, 1969 and accordingly all these 80,088 acres of lands were https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ brought under the control of the Government. The said Act came intoforce on 27.11.1974 vide notification published in G.O.Ms.No.587,C.T.& R.E. Department dated 18.11.1974. An Assistant SettlementOfficer was appointed under the said Act and statutory enquiry wastaken up and Settlement process was completed under various sectionsof the said Act for an extent of 28,087.03 acres. Remaining 52,000acres of lands fall under section 17 of the said Act. The Janmiescreated lease in the Janmam Lands before the appointed day that is27.11.1974 for the purpose of cultivation of plantation crops. Theperiod of lease was 12,24,36, 48 and 96 years, as the case may be, asmentioned in the lease deed. The Janmi has also been collectinglease amount ranging from 25 paise to 10 rupees per acre per year andimposed certain conditions while creating lease deeds. There were 11major and 82 smaller estates having land on lease falling undersection 17 of the said Act and 143 lease documents were executed andsome of the lessees had more than one plantation lease document.Further, the respondents submitted that the said Act was challengedin the year 1970 by way of writ petitions, which were dismissedupholding the validity of the said Act. Certain aggrieved personsfiled Civil Appeals against the said order before the Hon'ble SupremeCourt, which were also dismissed. Thereafter an amendment wasbrought. Again the said Act was challenged before this Court whichwere disposed of by a common Judgment. 11 Major estates to whom landswere leased out by the Janmies for raising plantation crops by meansof long term lease deeds took the matter before the Hon'ble SupremeCourt, in which an interim order of stay was granted. At that stage,some of the major estates sought to withdraw their petitions, whichwas permitted and finally the Hon'ble Supreme Court has dismissed allthe Civil Appeals and the applicants before the Supreme Court havebeen directed to challenge the appropriate proceedings an orderpassed by the State Government against them either on theirapplication under section 9 or under section 17 of the said Act andthe Hon'ble Supreme Court also vacated the interim order grantedearlier. Only in respect of the three lessees, the five member benchof the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred the matter for the decision ofthe bench consisting of three judges of the Hon'ble Supreme Court todecide the question of constitutional validity of the inclusion ofthe said Act in the IX schedule of the Constitution of India. Nowthere is no legal impediment to enforce the said Act in respect ofthe nine petitioners as well as others, except in respect of thethree petitioners therein. The stay granted by the Hon'ble SupremeCourt in 1978 still holds good in respect of three petitionerstherein. The extent of 52,000.71 acres of land falling under section17 of the said Act which is unsettled are held by 11 major estatesand 82 small estates. The stay granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Courton 23.08.1978 was vacated only in 1999 after the period of 21 years.One of the conditions stipulated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in itsinterim stay order is that the petitioner also undertakes not toalienate any part of the properties involved in the writ petition,whether by way of sale, mortgage or otherwise till the disposal ofthe writ petition. Therefore, 11 major estates also extended theirdeveloped area in violation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court order.There were several transactions in the land holdings of the estates.As per the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Settlement https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Officer was appointed in the cadre of District Revenue Officerexclusively for settlement work. Enquiry and survey work is underway in respect of the 9 major estates covered by the Hon'ble SupremeCourt order. However, the lease has expired in 79 estates and inthree cases lease executed by the erstwhile Janmies is in currency.About an extent of 7857.12 acres of land is held by these 79 smallestates in various villages under section 17 of the said Act with thelease hold rights created for the purpose of plantation of theerstwhile Janmi and subsisting on the appointed day that is27.11.1974. In the counter it is further submitted that 79 smallestates did not obtain required permission under the Private ForestsAct. Further, as per the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (CentralAct 69 of 1980), prior approval of the Central Government isnecessary for diversion of forest area for non-foresting purpose suchas clear felling of forest area for raising plantation like coffee,Tea, Cardamom, etc. But the above estates have also violated theprovisions of the said Central Act. The Forest land comes under thepurview of Section 9 of the Act. The Ryotwari patta for thesettlement has to be taken into account on the application made bythe petitioners concerned. Therefore, there were Ryotwari Settlementwas introduced in the Janmam Lands under section 8,9 and 10 of thesaid Act. Under section 8 of the said Act, the Janmis were entitledto ryotwari patta and the tenants were entitled to ryotwari pattaunder section 9 of the said Act and under section 10 of the said Act,personal cultivators of the Janmam lands who cultivated such landsfor a continuous period of three agricultural years immediatelybefore the 1st day of June 1969. Besides this section, section 17 ofthe said Act is dealing with the cultivation of plantation crops.Interim compensation has been deposited in Tribunal Court that is inDistrict Court, Udhagamandalam and final compensation will be arrivedat after a decision is taken by the Government for the extent of theproperty for settlement of lands under section 9 of the Act by givingpatta to various persons. 6. In such circumstances, now the only option left to thepetitioners is that they can approach the authorities under section 9or under section 17 as the case may be and those who are eligible forpatta under section 9 of the said Act, the competent officer has toconsider the case of the petitioners and has to issue patta. So thequestion of patta to be issued under section 9 of the said Act doesnot arise unless there is an application before the authoritiesconcerned. Further section 9 of the Act provides that every tenantbe entitled to ryotwari patta in respect of lands in occupation onand from the appointed day. Therefore the direction sought for bythe petitioners in furtherance of the order of the Hon'ble SupremeCourt is not applied to these 194 members filed by the associationconcerned and in respect of forest area, it is only the competentofficer of the forest department can decide and hence it was decidedby the District Administration that in respect of small estates whoseleases already expired, the lands held by them which fall undersection 17 of the said Act have to be resumed and handed over toPanchayats concerned, in 'as is where is' condition for futuremaintenance and control. Therefore, notice boards to the effect thatthe properties belong to Government and that the Trespassers in such https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ properties will be prosecuted have be displayed in the conspicuousplace. Accordingly, the work of erecting notice boards in the landsheld by the estate concerned commenced. But no eviction has beencarried out in the estate concerned. Therefore, as on date, there isno eviction proceedings. Unless the interim order is vacated, therespondent Government would be put to irreparable loss and hardship.Therefore, the respondents prayed for dismissal of writ petitions.7. Heard Mr.R.Muthukumaraswamy, Senior Counsel, Mrs.NaliniChidambaram, Senior Counsel, Mr.Silambannan, Senior Counsel,Mr.K.A.Ramakrishnan, Mrs.Selvi George, Mr.T.P.Manoharan,Mr.A.Prabhakar and Mr.John Zachariah, counsel appearing for thepetitioners and Mr.P.S.Raman, learned Additional Advocate Generalassisted by Mr.A.Edwin Prabakar, Additional Government Pleader andMr.S.N.Kirubanandam, Special Government Pleader appearing forrespondents and Forest Department. 8. Admittedly, the lands in question were controlled by anenactment and the provisions of the enactment have been challengedbefore this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble SupremeCourt in finality after permitting the applicants before the Hon'bleSupreme Court for withdrawal of the applications, directed theapplicants to place appropriate applications before the competentauthorities in respect of their claim for grant of ryotwari patta.The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners havecontended that after the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, thepetitioners have made applications before the Settlement Officer ofthe respective jurisdiction and the Settlement Officer concerned hasto pass orders on consideration of the case of the petitioners afterconducting proper enquiry and personal hearing. According to them,the Settlement officer has not taken effort to pass appropriateorders. On the other hand, now the respondents have proceeded inputting up the notice board in the respective areas and not totrespass as they claim right over the properties. The learnedcounsel further contended that the action of the respondents is nowcontrary to the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Therefore,before deciding the petitioners claim for settlement of ryotwaripatta, under section 9 or under section 17 of the Act, the competentauthority cannot give any room to the local panchayat to initiateaction or put up any notice board. 9. On the other hand, the learned additional Advocate Generalappearing for the Government has traced the history of the Janmamlands and the various proceedings taken by the petitioners beforethis court as well as before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and thevarious orders passed by this Court as well as the Hon'ble SupremeCourt. The learned Additional Advocate General has strenuouslycontended that the lands in question are of two categories. Onecomes under Section 9 of the Act and the other one comes undersection 17 of the Act, which are under the purview of the Secretaryto Government, Forest Department, where under proper notificationonly the petitioners can claim any right over the property and thelands which come under the purview under section 9 of the Act, thepetitioners can make a proper application as per the rules prescribed https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ and the competent authority may be directed to consider their casesin accordance with law.10. I have given careful consideration on the submission made bythe learned counsel on either side.11. Admittedly, the issue challenged in all these writ petitionsand the finality of the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court are notin dispute. All the petitioners have agreed to adhere to thedirections of the Hon'ble Supreme Court to make an application to thecompetent authority, i.e., Settlement Officer as per the rules of theAct. But some of them have already made applications to thecompetent officer and some of them have to make applications, whichare subject to acceptance of the competent authority. Hence, afterhearing the arguments of the learned counsel on either side and theirfair submissions, I feel it appropriate to direct all thosepetitioners who have not made any application before the competentofficer to make proper applications in the prescribed format as perrules within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copyof this order and to direct the respondents to consider thoseapplications which have been already received along with freshapplications subject to verification.12. Accordingly, all those petitioners who have not made anyapplication before the competent officer are directed to make properapplications in the prescribed format as per rules within a period ofsix weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and onreceipt of such applications, the respondents are directed toconsider those applications, which were already pending and thoseapplications received afresh, in the light of the orders passed bythe Hon'ble Supreme Court and in accordance with Section 9 or undersection 17 of the said Act after affording opportunity to the partiesconcerned and pass appropriate orders within a period of six weeksthereafter. Till such time, the respondents shall not take anycoercive action against the petitioners.13. The writ petitions are disposed of on the above terms. Nocosts. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.Sd/-Asst. Registrar./true copy/Sub Asst. Registrar.rg https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To1. The Secretary to Government State of Tamil Nadu Revenue Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.2. The Collector, Nilgiris District, Collectorate, Udhagamandalam, Nilgiris.3. The Settlement Officer (Gudalur Jenmom Estates) The Collectorate of the Nilgiris, Udhagamandalam, Nilgiris District4. The Secretary to Government Forest Department5.The Commissioner and Directorof Survey and settlementChepauk, Chennai-56.The Executive OfficerO' Valley Town PanchayatNew Hope- 643 226The Nilgiris7.The Director of survey andSettlement, Chepauk,Chennai-600 005.8.The Executive OfficerGudalur MunicipalityNilgiris District9.The District Forest OfficerGudalur Division, Gudalur post 643 211Nilgiris District10.The Executive OfficerGudalur III Grade MunicipalityGudalur, The Nilgiris District11. The Revenue Divisional OfficerGudalur, the Nilgiris District https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

12.The TahsildarGudalur, The Nilgiris District13.The Executive OfficerPandalur Town PanchayatNelliyalamThe Nilgiris1 cc to the Government Pleader, AAGI S. 51588 1 ccs to the Government Pleader, SR. 51602 1 cc to the Government Pleader, AAGI Sr. 5160512 ccs to M/s. T.S. Gopalan, and Co, Advocate, sR. 51363 to 51366and 51368 to 5137522 ccs to the Special Government Pleader(Forests) SR. 51309 to 51329and 518302 cc sto Mr.S. Silambanan Advocate, Sr,. 51632 and 516333 ccs to M/s. K.A. Ramakrishnan and S. Sukumar, Advocate, Sr. 51234to 512362 ccs to Mr.T.P. Manoharan and D. Kamatchi, Advocate, SR. 512951 cc to M/s. Rathina Asohan, Advocate, SR. 512081 cc to Mr.A. Prabhakaran, Advocate, sR. 51443W.P.No.22501 of 2007 etc batchVC (CO)kk 11/9